Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Mukesh Kumar SinghversusThe Managing Director Cum Chairman

Decided
Disposal
DISPOSED

Holding

The writ petition is not maintainable because the appellant must pursue the alternative remedy provided under Section 127 of the Electricity Act, 2003.

Summary

Mukesh Kumar Singh appealed against a Final Assessment Letter issued by the Assistant Electrical Engineer, seeking to quash and stay the order. The Single Judge dismissed the writ petition, holding that an alternative remedy under Section 127 of the Electricity Act, 2003 was available. The appellant argued that Section 127(2) required a deposit of half the assessed amount, which he could not afford. The High Court, relying on the Supreme Court’s decision in Rikhab Chand Jain v. Union of India, affirmed that the alternative statutory appeal is the proper remedy and found no illegality in the lower court’s order. It noted that an application for reduction of the deposit could be considered, but otherwise disposed of the Letters Patent Appeal.

Issues considered

  • Whether the writ petition challenging the Final Assessment Letter is maintainable when an alternative remedy under Section 127 of the Electricity Act, 2003 exists
  • Whether the requirement of depositing half the assessed amount under Section 127(2) bars the appellant from filing the statutory appeal

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • Electricity Act 2003
  • Section 127
  • Final assessment order
  • Alternative statutory appeal
  • Deposit requirement
  • Letters Patent Appeal
  • Financial hardship

Judgment

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                         Letters Patent Appeal No.323 of 2025
                                            In
                    Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.18577 of 2024
     ======================================================
     Mukesh Kumar Singh Son of Brij Nandan Singh, Resident of Gayan Chak,
     P.O.- Kothiya, P.S.- Didarganj, District- Patna.

                                                                 ... ... Appellant/s
                                   Versus
1.   The Managing Director Cum Chairman South Bihar Power Holding
     Company vidyut Bhawan No. 1 Bailey Road, (Nehru Path) Patna.
2.   The Electrical Superintendent Engineer S.T.F, Electricity Supply Circle
     Patna.
3.   The Electrical Executive Engineer M.R.T. Electric Supply M.R.T, Division
     Bakhtiyarpur, District- Patna.
4.   The Assistant Electrical Engineer S.T.F, Electric Supply Circle, Patna.
5.   The Assistant Electrical Engineer Cum Assessing Officer, Dedarganj, Patna.

                                               ... ... Respondent/s
     ======================================================
     Appearance :
     For the Appellant/s    :      Mr. Mani Bhushan Kumar, Advocate
     For the Respondent/s   :      Mr. Vivek Prasad, Advocate
     For the SBPDCL         :      Dr. Anand Kumar, Advocate
                                   Mr. Rajan Prakash, Advocate
                                   Ms. Anuradha Mishra, Advocate
     ======================================================
     CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
             and
             HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RITESH KUMAR
     ORAL JUDGMENT
     (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)
     Date : 08-01-2026
                      The appellant, Mukesh Kumar Singh, has filed

      this Letters Patent Appeal challenging the order dated

      12.02.2025 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 18577 of 2024. The

      appellant had approached this Court for quashing/setting aside

      and stay of Final Assessment Letter No. 962 dated 04.10.2024,

      passed by the Assistant Electrical Engineer, Electric Supply

      Sub-Division, Didarganj, Patna. The learned Single Judge, in the
Patna High Court L.P.A No.323 of 2025 dt.08-01-2026
                                             2/4




         impugned order, has been pleased to hold that an efficacious

         alternative remedy of filing an appeal under Section 127 of the

         Electricity Act, 2003 against the final assessment order is

         available to the appellant and therefore the writ petition was not

         entertained.

                                2. Section 127 of the Electricity Act, 2003

         reads as follows:-

                           "127. Appeal to appellate authority.-(1) Any
                          person aggrieved by a final order made under
                          section 126 may, within thirty days of the said
                          order, prefer an appeal in such form, verified in
                          such manner and be accompanied by such fee as
                          may be specified by the State Commission, to an
                          appellate authority as may be prescribed.
                                                   (2) No appeal against an order of
                          assessment        under       sub-section   (1)   shall   be
                          entertained unless an amount equal to [half of the
                          assessed-amount] is deposited in cash or by way of
                          bank draft with the licensee and documentary
                          evidence of such deposit has been enclosed
                          alongwith the appeal.
                                                      (3) The appellate authority
                          referred to in sub-section (1) shall dispose of the
                          appeal after hearing the parties and pass
                          appropriate order and send copy of the order to the
                          assessing officer and the appellant.
                                                (4) The order of the appellate
Patna High Court L.P.A No.323 of 2025 dt.08-01-2026
                                             3/4




                          authority referred to in sub-section (1) passed
                          under sub-section (3) shall be final.
                                                (5) No appeal shall lie to the
                          appellate authority referred to in sub-section (1)
                          against the final order made with the consent of the
                          parties.
                                                (6) When a person defaults in
                          making payment of assessed amount, he, in
                          addition to the assessed amount, shall be liable to
                          pay, on the expiry of thirty days from the date of
                          order of assessment, an amount of interest at the
                          rate of sixteen per cent per annum compounded
                          every six months."


                                3. Learned counsel for the appellant, though he

         does not dispute that an alternative remedy is available to the

         appellant, submits that in view of sub-section (2) of Section 127,

         the appellant is required to deposit half of the assessed amount

         for entertaining the appeal.

                                4. Learned counsel further submits that the

         financial condition of the appellant is not good and it would not

         be possible for the appellant to deposit half of the assessed

         amount.

                                5. Be that as it may, in view of the settled

         position of law which has recently been reiterated by the

         Hon'ble Apex Court in Civil Appeal No. 6719 of 2012 (Rikhab
             Patna High Court L.P.A No.323 of 2025 dt.08-01-2026
                                                          4/4




                      Chand Jain vs The Union of India & Ors.) disposed of on

                      12.11.2025 and admittedly an alternative remedy is available.

                                             6. In view of the limited scope of the Letters

                      Patent Appeal, we find no perversity/illegality in the impugned

                      order. However, while filing the appeal, as observed in the

                      impugned order, if any application is filed for reducing the

                      deposit of the assessed amount, the same shall be considered in

                      accordance with law.

                                             7. With the aforesaid observation(s), the appeal

                      stands disposed of.




                                            (Sangam Kumar Sahoo, CJ)


                                                    ( Ritesh Kumar, J)
Neha/-
AFR/NAFR
CAV DATE
Uploading Date          12.01.2026
Transmission Date


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.